User talk:Richfife/archive

Welcome!

Hello, Richfife/archive, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! , SqueakBox 22:48, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bearclaw Coffee

Thanks for being fair and explaining the situation. Although it upsets me because of all the time I put into the edit, I'm glad you handle even my heated demeanor with respect and calm. So is the cutback due to the space allowed for wikipedia articles, or the perception as to what users want to know about? Will the future growth and notability of the company denote the amount of information enclosed in the article? Just so I know for the future.

On another note, because the article has been cut down so much, is the COI tag still necessary?

Mylo Carbia

Good job and very professional! My hat off to you. Wiki needs more people like you.Tony the Marine 05:23, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• My friend, I hope that you write something about yourself in your user page. It'll be a great for others to know more about you. Take care Tony the Marine 04:01, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. You didn't answer me if it's in Glendale, Arizona? (smile).)

---

Barnstar

This Tireless Contributor Barnstar is presented to User:Richfife, for his amazing investigative work in Wilipedia articles. Presented by Tony the Marine 23:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please accept this barnstar on my behalf. You deserve it and if you wish you may display it on your User page. For me it has been an honor to have befriended you. Tony the Marine 23:44, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. I would like to know if you can check this guy out Frederick Lois Riefkohl?)

---

Online IQ Testing

iqte.st is a professional resource. It educates the general audience about the perils of online iq testing. Declaring it "spam" is risible. Consider removing links to unethical online businesses before removing a valuable educational resource acessible to the general Wiki community. As I've stated elsewhere, I have no personal or professional relationship with their staff. It is to be shared with as wide an audience as possible; they (and you) are susceptible to being duped by terrible websites who might part users from their money.

Based on our user profiles, we're both healthy eaters. Let's make sure other Wiki contributors and surfers have a proper diet of nutritous websites. :) BrainDoc 20:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll replace the removed link. Let me know what you think. Thanks.  :) BrainDoc 13:42, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

stormfront

I agree with you about censorship - I despise it as well. However, when you're faced with a choice between gross disinformation and no information, maybe no information is better sometimes.

I don't believe that the site can ever be a useful site. You can see that they don't have a problem with recruiting as many other people as they need. I had to hold them off pretty much alone until today. The thing is, most non-Stormfront people just don't know or care about it so they'll never get involved in the site. That means that the rare person who DOES look for it on wiki is going to get nothing but fact selection and disinformation.

As for a semi-protected article - I just don't know how that would work. Who would write it, and how would decisions be made? These guys were entirely unwilling to compromise with me.

Anyway, thanks for the input. Stick to the Facts 05:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Churches

• Good call on keeping the one and moving to delete the others. Carlossuarez46 18:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stanley Gallon AfD

Excellent work on managing the mess! I'm slightly in awe of how you picked through all the edits to make sense of it. My hat, also, is off to you. OBM | ^blah blah blah 08:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IPA (Dorothea Lange)

You misunderstood. It's fine to have multiple pronunciations guides present, but they should all say the same thing. If the IPA version is correct, your version gave the wrong pronunciation. Spreading misinformation is far worse than having information that's allegedly harder to digest, but has the benefit of being precise. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 06:39, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation: Ascended master

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ascended master, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. - Richfife 18:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mediate?

A long dispute at [1] really needs mediation by a reasonable third voice, formally or not. Nobody has responded at RfC. Would you help? Hele 7 19:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really big thanks for fast and efficient termination of this long and dirty war. Hele 7 08:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Christas

Because it came and went so quickly (and because I somehow don't think Wikipedia has seen the end of this particular phenomenon), I wanted to make sure you'd seen this, putatively from LCCF's former chair. [2] Given your first-rate factchecking, I thought it would likely be of interest. The whole thing is just...odd. Robertissimo 14:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

Hi, I have sent you and the other members involved in the dispute at Ascended master an email using Special:Emailuser/Richfife. Once everyone has responded, mediation will begin by email. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:14, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I did not receive a response to the email that I sent you. Please send me an email using Special:Emailuser/PinchasC with the items that would like mediated so that mediation can begin. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 13:09, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

Nobody did the cleanup at Ascended master. The article contains many links to blatant religious propaganda from the same source, sect-specific language with excessive capitalisation etc. Aburesz always removed all critical links, NPOV and cleanup tags and similar from the article. So I tagged the article as a fansite. Aburesz deleted the tag (repeatedly) and has obtained protection of the page in its present state. As a result, the article has been protected in strongly unbalanced state and nobody can improve it. Please help to resolve the situation. Hele 7 19:10, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ostrovsky

I just made a further cut , in the spirit of your excellent editing, and Marcmcp has reverted both mine and yours,. I have warned him about the 3RR, but you might like to have a look. DGG 04:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for keeping an eye on things and providing a second voice! - Richfife 14:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Dotson Inc.

I have just contacted 3 wiki administrators about your Defamation of Character issues. Thank You 3mgworld 23:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Be my guest! - Richfife 00:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: 3mgworld was banned by Uncle G after this particular run - Richfife 03:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cruel?

Dude, do you have a discussion, diff or reference for that rule of thumb? That's the best rationale ever if there's a policy to back it up. Pardon my gushing.

Several RfC questions - have you done several? I tried to do the 'pay it forward' thing with the RfC but the ones I looked into (maybe 5) appear to be an awful mess. I wouldn't mind doing more RfC, but not if I'm stuck spending an hour trying to figure out if it needs it, or it's been archived. If the RfC has been met, should I remove it? One in particular was archived, but still on the RfC page.

WLU 20:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I could have sworn I read it somewhere, and it IS an understandable distillation of WP:WEB, but I can't find where I saw it exactly. I'll check around. I've done a handful of RFC's, but not that many. This one kind of raised my hackles because of a run in I had with Marc Ostrofsky, who's the king of that kind of webpage. - Richfife 01:05, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you turn it up, I would be most obliged if you could drop me the link on my talk page.

Thanks! WLU 20:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, looking at Chunky Rice's comments, he's got a point about it being hugely subjective. What I'm happiest to see is that there is uniformity across editors that the site is inappropriate. Thanks for your input. WLU 17:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gun fu

hi, you mentioned not putting quotes around the term "gun fu" - what about renaming the article then, as the term itself is a neologism? cheers. 86.27.73.208 16:51, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added to the discussion. I'm in favor of renaming, I'm just not sure what to rename it to. - Richfife 17:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Bennet... I mean, Noah Bennet... no, wait, Noah... umm... who were we talking about?

No problem... that page has changed back-and-forth so many times I'm surprised the whole Wiki isn't dizzy. Perhaps move protection might be in order until this can be resolved. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 18:13, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Christas - Recrudescence

You'd think I'd have something better to do with my time (and I do, but that's another matter), but I've been checking now and again for the inevitable return to these parts of LindaChristiana, and I think it has started, viz Student-First_Accreditation, which is linked from their homepage and has been principally edited by usernames identical to the putative dean of the school and a writer who has bylined some recent columns on the subject that have managed to appear on line. One oddity: the name of the dean seems to be morphing; formerly Ronald F. Bernard, he has now appeared in one column as "Rodney Bernard" (can't find that citation online right now) and "Frank Bernard"[3]. Given that this "concept" is a wholly LC-originated one (and almost definitively non-notable), what to do? Robertissimo 07:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering what those guys were up to. Looks like they're taking their show on the road and sending out fake "opinion pieces" to gullible small newspapers. Oy. Buckle up. - Richfife 14:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you believe it? Here we are, two years later - and they're back: Linda Christas College. Do you have the energy; I'm racing around for a bit and don't.... Robertissimo (talk) 13:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SimpList Delete

So you need to be either a publisher, a well know writer of some description? 121.44.212.213 11:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heroes of Azerbaijan

An article like that could only be OR and POV. See the Babak dispute for example. You should put it up for deletion (since you are third party). I was thinking that I might do it but I decided not to for now. But a "heroes" list of any kind can only be POV and OR.Azerbaijani 13:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dacy himself admits that the article about POV rather than facts: "We are not speaking about historical fact rather than perception" (I quoted Dacy himself) By the way, he also reinserted the historical figures...Azerbaijani 20:46, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is distorting meaning of my words and don't quote the whole passage. See discussion on talkpage.--Dacy69 21:24, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the entire passage:

We are not speaking about historical fact rather than perception. This page is not about historical facts, it is about national heroes of Azerbaijan honoured in Azerbaijan as such. Assumption might be based on myths, narratives, traditions, and finally some kind of official blessing.

Would you like to tell me how I'm distorting the meaning of your words?Azerbaijani 21:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That should looks like this We are not speaking about historical fact rather than perception. This page is not about historical facts, it is about national heroes of Azerbaijan honoured in Azerbaijan as such. Assumption might be based on myths, narratives, traditions, and finally some kind of official blessing

I think people with medium level of intelligence understand what I am talking about when we speak about historical myths, perceptions, traditions. Like Russian believe that legendary Igor was their national hero, though he might been even Scandinavian, non-Russian. Romul and Rem might be - or not - founders of Rome. This is legend, myth, perception. But this people are honoured in Italy or Russia as founders or heroes respectively. The same with Babek whoever he was. We have created the page about heroes honoured in Azerbaijan. --Dacy69 21:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a second, two things. 1) Did you just personally attack me? I think you did, interesting... 2) Did you say "we have created the page", are you saying that this was a group project? Dacy, is there some sort of coalition that you think we may need to know about? Either you and Zondi are the same person (which is why you said we created) or you guys planned all of this together...hm...Azerbaijani 21:52, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki is collobarative efforts. You know it, as you like speaking about Wiki rules. When you and I edit page for example Caucasian Albania - it is we. No one own the article. As for national heroes, I came there later even than you. But it is not Zondi's page, not me and not you. Wikipedia is public domain, and belongs to everybody--Dacy69 22:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you said we created the page... You clearly said that.Azerbaijani

Yes, I said, as in Wiki we (including you who was second editor on that page) all doing together.I created several pages, including recently, which was later edited or supplemented--Dacy69 22:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time out for another 4 hours, please. I'm at work. Thanks! - Richfife 22:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, let's stick to the facts about the current content of the article for now. Who created the article is ultimately secondary to what it contains. Anyway, I'd like to switch this back to the articles talk page here. That way the others can see what's going on. See you there! - Richfife 05:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phillipine heroes

A source for the list, from the Phillipine Congress, has been provided in the AfD discussion. This may change your thoughts on the article. —Gaff ^ταλκ 22:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I overhauled the article and re-wrote it with the official recommendations and some explanations on why it did not push through (but its official nonetheless). --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:48, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HilltopMall.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:HilltopMall.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:58, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dawn of the Dead Pruning

Thanx for the kind words. I suppose it's trying bail out the ocean with a teaspoon, but it passes the time..--Geoduck 19:48, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ILike2BeAnonymous

I thought you might be interested that ILike2BeAnonymous is up to vandalism and uncivility again on the Richmond, California article, he called the editor that added the content that I added stupid and is very agressive and abrasive in his edit summaries using the word crap frequently aswell as calling my revertions of his vandalism, vandalism.^Cholga is a SUPERSTAR¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 23:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TALK PAGE

Discussion page vandalism Blanking the posts of other users from talk pages other than your own, Wikipedia space, and other discussions, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc., is generally considered vandalism. An obvious exception is moving posts to a proper place (e.g. protection requests to WP:RFPP). Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page, where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion.

Nice Try. - kevinbocking 23:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well since you guys seem to be all powerful couldn't you just conjure it up? - kevinbocking 23:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not your right to make other editor's work difficult. - Richfife 23:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha. Okay then, if you want to have my posts so badly, i'll archive them :S - kevinbocking 23:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. - Richfife 23:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your !vote on school notability was ignored

Your !vote in favor of keeping the article Father Michael Goetz Secondary School at this AfD was ignored by a closing administrator who decided that your vote did not properly explain why the school was notable. While many people think that all schools are notable, we need to make specific claims that the specific school (or anything else you're !voting to keep) is notable. I strongly encourage you to review the requirements of Wikipedia:notability and to consider modifying the justification of your decision to keep an article in any future AfD, school or otherwise. If based on your review of Wikipedia policy and a particular article you feel that the school is indeed notable, a variation of the text "Keep because notability is demonstrated by citation to multiple reliable sources that discuss the subject significantly", (as suggested here), will clearly state why you feel that the article meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If you do not properly support your vote, you take the risk that your participation will be ignored if the closing administrator so chooses, as has already happened to your vote at this AfD. If you feel that your !vote should not have been ignored, you may want to visit the deletion review to express your thoughts on the subject. Alansohn 17:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Box Office Leaders USA

Template:Box Office Leaders USA has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Steinninn 02:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey

i think you might be interested in commenting here since you have recently had issues with this user with a similar issue and may have something important to comment, thank you.^Cholga is a SUPERSTAR¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 07:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ILike2BeAnonymous

Regarding your recent suggestion that I "decloak": thanks for sharing that with me, but no. Different strokes for different folks, dontcha know. +ILike2BeAnonymous 18:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your continued schoolmarm-ish chiding, I'd like to know: who the hell do you think you are? And I assume you're also going to come down hard on Cholga for her anonymity, right? (By the way, why do you assume I'm a "he"?) +ILike2BeAnonymous 19:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another question: Why the hell are you following my activities, like this comment left on the "talk" page of an admin I communicated with? And why the interest in my checkuser requests? How, pray tell, is that any of your beeswax? +ILike2BeAnonymous 06:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your latest: all I can say is whoa, big guy: I'm not accusing you of Wiki-stalking, don't plan on running to any admins about this, etc. This is as far as this has to go so far as I'm concerned, now that you've answered my previous comment. +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(FYI to passers by: Other half of this conversation is here: User_talk:ILike2BeAnonymous) - Richfife 14:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---

Regarding your latest:

1. I'll thank you not to watch over me like some kind of schoolmarm. I don't need or want a "minder".

2. I don't give a damn about "social"; I'm interested in the integrity and reliability of this so-called "encyclopedia". +ILike2BeAnonymous 19:08, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple unrelated questions

I had a couple unrelated questions for you.

Would you be willing to help me clean up World War Z? The article is currently at loggerjams over trying to reduce the plot summary and try and incorporate some more info that isn't plot summary. You expressed interest in the novel at the Battle of Yonkers AFD.

Also, do you use IRC at all? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, uh... Do you prefer "A Man" or "Mr. In Black"? Riding herd on an fanboy bait article like World War Z is a full time job, believe me. I try to do it on Dawn of the Dead (2004 film) from time to time, but I haven't had much luck there and the drive-by editors there are clearly not half as determined as the World War Z group. User:Geoduck should get a medal for the work he's done there. I'll try and poke my head in from time to time, but it seems like a fair number of people like it just the way it is and I'm not in a position to fight off that kind of consensus.

I'm not on IRC (sorry). I used to be, but I got bored of it in about 1986 (that's not a typo) and stopped. - Richfife 03:09, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, I ususally use AMIB.

Well, any help you could provide at World War Z would be appreciated. I don't think things are quite out of control there.

As for IRC, I was just going to invite you over to the Wikipedia channels on Freenode. No worries if you're not interested. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the heads up

thanks for the heads up... i'm not sure the info i'd like to add will come sooner than the article will probably be marked for deletion now.. but i guess i could wait for someone else to make it for me... id rather not be looked at negatively for an attempt though, but it seems that is now inevitable. ah well, thanks for the heads up.. i guess my fate lies with wiki editors now. - Ed

also it's cool to see your accomplishments. perhaps i will focus mine in my bio as well.

Zabulon vs. Zavulon in Dusk Watch

Hi Richfife. I read the books and saw the movies in Russia wherein the character is referred to as "Zavulon". I was also under the impression that the English pages concerning the novels and movies were referring to him as such because under the Day Watch (novel) page, his name is spelled in the Russian way, so to speak. I guess I'll go add a tidbit there now about this discrepancy. Thanks for the pointer. - (Sausagerooster 02:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

richmond

would you please comment in the earthquake section^Cholga is a SUPERSTAR¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 02:35, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

request for comment

would you please comment here?^Cholga is a SUPERSTAR¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 00:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Kelly (Musician)

Good job making something useful out of that. :) Kudos. Moonriddengirl 20:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pianoencyclopedia

Sorry I don't know where to put this comment, however: How can the link pianoencyclopedia.com that contains free chord dictionaries be "(to piano-oriented site) that's too unrelated to the subject of this article" whose title is chords?! Please be rational. Best regards, Rod IP 201.235.129.18

• The site contains nothing but promises that the information will be "Coming Soon". Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.- Richfife 00:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bearclaw Coffee Page

You erased all of my work. I don't get it, Starbuck's page lets them explain where their name came from, why isn't their's deleted? I was using the Starbucks and Beaner's page as a template to know what to add so it wouldn't get deleted. And as for the COI tag, I don't even work for the Bearclaw people, where did anyone get that from? It's just a store that originated in my town so I thought I'd be nice and give them a page. All the information I gathered was from the newspaper articles on their media page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lance1cj (talk • contribs)

Adding items to AFD

I do not think you should keep adding more items to this AFD, because once a comment has been posted, you adding another item would imply that the person who commented automatically endorses or opposes the newly added article Corpx 16:06, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had a sentence in there (it's gone now) stating "If this sentence is still here, I'm still adding items to this AFD." I guess you missed it. - Richfife 16:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese Americans list

Out of curiousity, why did you put Asian-Americans in that list (which is going to get that AfD a lot of "keeps" because it is a racial listing, not really an "ethnic" one), instead of more obscure ones like List of Turkish-Americans or List of Laotian Americans? Bulldog123 05:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shear lack of time to work out the ideal distinctions. The accusations of racism were already flying and I only had about 15 minutes at the computer. - Richfife 06:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

comment request

Hi there, would you be so kind as to provide an indepenant neutral opinion of the image Construccionkaiserrick.jpg at the section of the same name on the talk page of Richmond Medical Center here please? Thank you very much as this may help to alleviate a current debate over its inclusion.Cholga^talK! 01:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting

You might consider relisting the lists from the mass nom of Portuguese Americans. I already did some. See List of Belgian Americans and List of Bahamian Americans. I grouped them together by geographic area. Bulldog123 05:03, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did a few more, but I rather not do all seeing as some people have been following my nomination streak about quickly putting "KEEP!" Can you nominate a few separately? Bulldog123 08:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try and sneak some in later today. Thanks! - Richfife 15:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• We most definitely need your input on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of German Americans, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Norwegian Americans, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Russian Americans and many more. Lots of people are very confused why these are being nominated. Bulldog123 07:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KaiserPerm.jpg

This image has no description, nothing to identify it at all. While it is used in articles it appears to be a nondescript street scene. I suggest it is likely to become a deletion candidate precisely because of the lack of description, and feel you should go back and correct this omission. I hope you find this a helpful suggestion. Fiddle Faddle 19:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This really does need more attention than you gave it. I have put it up for a community consensus as a deletion discussion (see below). I may, of course, be proved incorrect. I suggest that, if you wish to ensure the image is saved, you put in some serious work on the description at least, and seriously consider replacing the image with a substantially more useful and better composed one. Fiddle Faddle 07:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree on a level fundamental enough that I'm not sure there's room for discussion. - Richfife 15:22, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I note that it is you who has stated that there is no room for discussion and am disappointed. But you are the uploader and it is your free choice. Since you say there is no room for discussion I will not check your talk page again and have removed it from my watchlist. I suggest any further discussion take place on the IfD nomination page. I only dropped you the notes as a wiki-courtesy Fiddle Faddle 15:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:KaiserPerm.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:KaiserPerm.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fiddle Faddle 07:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1

would you mind commenting here please? [4]Cholga^talK! 02:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image: Bike Ad

I would appreciate it very much if you would stop the name-calling in a discussion.-- TimmyTruck (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Context notes: IfD in question is here: Bike Ad. No further reply from me at this time. - -- Richfife (talk) 21:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Ostrofsky Page

Richfife -

I have just reviewed the information you listed on Mr. Ostrofsky's page regarding Conflicts with the .eu Domain Name Registry.

The information you have posted is not factual.

Mr. Ostrofsky did not own these companies.

I have read in your bio that you disagree with people owning domain names, and that you feel it should be controlled in a manner similar to the FCC. This information would lead me to perceive that you have a personal "beef" with Mr. Ostrofsky. The articles you have posted are slander based on the fact that they are incorrect, not factual, and in a public venue.

As per the Wikipedia etiquette I am informing you of this prior to taking any formal action. Based on this, I would expect that you will remove your posting, or I will be forced to report you to Wikipedia.

I will look for this to be removed by 5:00 PM on Wednesday, November 28, 2007.

Thank you in advance for your time and cooperation.

--SondraLou (talk) 06:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Please refer to here going forward: Wikipedia Administrator's noticeboard.. - Richfife (talk) 18:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zabulon vs Zavulon

Thanks for letting me know about this, I wasn't aware. I'll have to go back and re-change it. Original Digga (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see you have already done it. Thanks Original Digga (talk) 08:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Box office leaders template

I think I've solved the date range problem with {{Box Office Leaders}} - see my comment at Template talk:Box Office Leaders... GregorB (talk) 23:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Groovy! Thanks! What's odd is that the solution is one of the things I tried that didn't work when I first wrote the template... - Richfife (talk) 00:11, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angie Gregory and Lori Jean Wilson

If these two actresses are deleted then I'll never donate or encourage others to donate to Wikipedia again. Of course all actors aren't movie stars but they are credited actresses on IMDB.com. They have both appeared on TV internationally & nationally as well as in movies that are on IMDB. What's the problem with keeping them on Wikipedia? Thanks Ashleyjuddfan (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(My reply is here. - Richfife (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Polyvios Kossivas

Thank you for handling the AfD closure. As you might suspect, this was my first AfD, and I wasn't sure how to proceed. CapnZapp (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American lists

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ethnic_groups#Proposal_to_Remove_List_of_X-American_lists

Thought I should inform you since you made the AfD. Bulldog123 (talk) 01:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page redesign

The Main Page Redesign proposal is currently conducting a straw poll to select five new designs, before an RFC in which one will be proposed to replace the Main Page. The poll closes on October 31st. Your input would be hugely appreciated! Many thanks, Pretzels^Talk! 08:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki's target audience

I was under the impression that wikipedia's target audience were intellectuals. Therefore, "dumbing down" any article has a negative impact on the encyclopaedia as a whole. Perhaps you should set up a kiddiepaedia or a dummiespaedia for those who can't handle precise and technically accurate information?

I chose not to actually edit the C preprocessor article because the controversy is not worth my time. However, I am concerned that the "next generation" of programmers will be incompetent if they are reading articles that lead them to believe they should use undefined behaviour to "work around" an issue which simply does not exist. Have you considered the macro "min(a,b,c,d)"? The second two arguments provide return values and, whilst it is a few extra characters of code, the macro offers all the benefits that the unsafe macro offers without being unsafe.

So two points: 1: Wikipedia should not be "dumbed down" 2: It was never about the target audience in the first place, it was about the ideal presented within the article being factually inaccurate. The statement "Within ANSI C, there is no reliable general solution to the issue of side-effects in macro arguments." holds no weight.

What's more, wikipedia is not supposed to be a training ground for programmers - the article should by all rights pertain to the technical specification of the preprocessor, the commands available and little else.

Under the terms of Wikipedia, I could make an edit and be "in the right" (factual inaccuracy vs precise technical description). However, it would cause a discussion to flare up on the talk page of that article and I simply do not have the time to "fight my corner" in this case so there is no point making the edit in the first place.

Either accept the fact that the article is misguided, prove to me that it isn't or simply drop the whole matter and move on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.236.244 (talk) 02:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plonk - Richfife (talk) 04:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alband.jpg

Hey, I just wanted to let you know I declined this speedy because images don't have to meet notability criteria. We can keep this image around (who knows, maybe someone will want to use it in a userbox or something: "this user listens to punk" :P) or you can take it to WP:FFD if you think it should be deleted. I'm happy to discuss it further if you like, let me know. Peace, delldot ∇. 06:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incumbent

Other half of conversation - Richfife (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's just it, you cannot hold the position for a future weekend. No one currently holds the position, because it has yet to be determined.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 19:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the difference. Obama will be President until the next election. Friday the 13th is not the leader of the box office until the next weekend. For all intents and purposes, it's technically like 7th place for the 2009 year. The template is for "films which have placed number one at the weekend box office" (that is what the page says that the template links to). It cannot be the "incumbent" leader for the following weekend, because when that weekend hits it's like everyone starts over from scratch. Now, if the template was "number one film for the year of 2009", then yes, it would be the incumbent until someone technically came by and earned more money than it. That isn't what the box says, and thus you cannot be an "incumbent" in this situation. A film can be at the top for two weekends in a row, but that doesn't mean that it is the automatic leader until the new weekend arrives (which kind of makes the box rather erroneous because of that fact).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To the first, the Steelers are still the Champs coming into the next year. Friday the 13th is still not the leader of the box office. They are not automatically the leader the next weekend, UNTIL someone knocks them off. When the next weekend starts, it's all even. No one has a leg up on anyone. If anything, in today's world the new movies have a leg up on whoever was there last weekend, because most films do not repeat weekends anymore. I don't know what you're referring to with your second example.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any in there that are based on the same setup as the film one. The film one is based on the idea of one this specific weekend, and only this weekend, X-film was #1. The music stuff appears to be contingent on a day-by-day basis (just merely updated once a week, probably because the numbers do not come out till the following week). This is not the same thing as film. By placing "incumbent" in the box, you're making the assumption, or at least providing the reader with the assumption, that the film will be the leader of the box office weekend the following weekend (unless otherwise decided). That isn't the case. We have no idea who will be the leader. Within music, you knock someone off the top spot. Friday the 13th is not at a top spot to be knocked off of. The fact that people have decided to use "Incumbent" in this location just means that it's widely being used incorrectly in most situations, not that it is the right term to be used.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why wouldn't they? You first used Obama as an excample. Obama is the "incumbent", because he is the person currently in office. Friday the 13th is not the current "Champ" of anything. Why are the two of us discussing this like we're going to institute some wide-spread, concrete definition anyway? This is something that should probably be firmly establish at the MOS page or somewhere similar.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 02:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Richfife/Bankruptcy

Hi, I really like your template for bankrupt companies. Would you mind if I moved/renamed it to Template:Current bankruptcy to bring it up to the standards of the other current events templates? --Eastlaw ^talk ⁄ _contribs 07:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mott the Hoople

Hi Richfife - finally saw your message:

Big fan here! Thanks for your music! Quick question to satisfy my OCD: Did you or Ian Hunter perform the piano on the studio version of "All the way from Memphis"? Thanks again! - Richfife (talk) 18:07, 30 June 2008

Answer is that it was Ian because I wasn't yet in the band. Later I played it on gigs and on the live album.

Do you know that the band will reform for 5 shows in London in October? So far the plan is it will only be the original five members. See www.mottthehoople.com

Cheers - Morgan Fisher —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morganfw (talk • contribs) 00:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Box office succession boxes

Hello, I noticed that you were the creator of the {{Box Office Leaders USA}} and {{Box Office Leaders}} templates. Lately, Bovineboy2008 (talk · contribs) is deprecating them, using instead the templates {{s-start}}, {{succession box}}, and {{end}} (as seen here at Hancock). He explained his reasoning, and I support the clean structuring of the succession boxes. I was wondering if you think there was a way to redesign your templates for cleaner structuring? Or should they be deprecated altogether? I am not very strong with template coding, so I was wondering what kind of combination of best practices could be discovered. —Erik (talk • contrib) 00:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there has been discussion at WT:FILM, and since there seems to be movement against succession boxes. I've nominated Template:Box Office Leaders and Template:Box Office Leaders USA for deletion, and discussion is here. Since you created both templates, I'm letting you know. —Erik (talk • contrib) 21:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Don't feed the trolls

O.k, I get it. Thanks for the tip! GamerPro64 (talk) 00:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Current bankruptcy

Template:Current bankruptcy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Yellowdesk (talk) 03:20, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sourcing

Great, I'll add my name to the list then shall I, since no one is likely to challenge the credits? WP:GACR states that a source is required for all information (as if risking the GA nom by edit warring wasn't enough). More to the point Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Templates states: "The fields for designer, writer, composer and artist should only be used if their entries are notable". The infobox should not be filled with a bunch of redlinks. bridies (talk) 01:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HELP !

Can anyone help me? One of the "administrators" of the page about me is RICH FIFE and I just found out he's one of the main vandals who keeps screwing with my page. (I'm a controversial progressive political activist who embarasses the rich and powerful, and, evidently, Rich is another Republican Troll whose job it is to hide truth and promote the Corporate Agenda!) 

FOR EXAMPLE, Rich removes SOURCED material (say, about my internationally-reported may 2004 humiliation of Bush's bogus 9/11 Commission which made Rudy Giuliani look like a fool) but allows UNSOURCED smears and insults like that I am "chronically-unemployed", which is news to me and my bosses of 10 years.)

But Wiki is unpoliced, so the rich and powerful Republicans can ride roughshod and steal all our money like Republicrat politicians do successfully every day. AARGH! - CXB "141.149.34.126 (talk) 16:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)"[reply]

(Posted here and in the article talk page) For the record, I did not add the "chronically unemployed" line and in fact, was the one who took it out here: [5]. It was placed by an IP editor from Germany (I live in California) here: [6]. I am not an Administrator, nor do I wish to be one. A number of edits (for instance this one [7]) did more harm than good, so I reverted them so I could get a chance to go over them point by point and restore the parts worth keeping, which I did here, here and here plus a number of other places. Brodeur publicly stated he was homeless on Gawker and then later on decried as libel (legal threat? Not sure) the fact that that was included in the article. The article makes very clear that he was on the ballot for the primary elections, but competed as a write in candidate in the general election. The New York City Board of Elections lists him as a write in candidate receiving 35 total votes here on page 8. The general election results of the 2001 Mayoral election here on page 1 do not mention him at all. The board of elections results hold more weight than Brodeur's unsupported claim that he was listed on the ballot. Also, the fact that he was voted for under 5 different spellings of his name indicates that there was no check box to be checked. The other claims (called a "hero" by a complete jury, etc.) lack any sort of reliable sourcing and can not be included per Wikipedia:Reliable sources until they do. - Richfife (talk) 17:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Brodeur

Rightyo, the new revision looks good to me. Thanks for the info, happy editing to you. Keegan (talk) 03:36, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: TJ&E 3.

Very interesting, thanks. Pity it wasn't published anywhere. bridies (talk) 14:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Motion blur

Hello Richfife. Some time ago you moved a picture from Motion blur article to Defocus aberration article. But that is wrong. This picture really shows motion blur (original image was blurred using convolution with a vector whose elements are all 1, see h(1,:) = ones(1,length); in function blur_c here). --DaBler (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Pinball

Since you're on the participants list, you might like to know I've made a user box for the project:

This user is a participant in WikiProject Pinball

along with many other improvments over there, including a to-do list and a whole new category structure. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 11:05, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Pinball

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Pinball. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 16:08, 18 January 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})[reply]

Proposed deletion of Arina Rodionovna

The article Arina Rodionovna has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

referring to Arina Rodionova; maybe a typo; link provided directs to Arina Rodionova WTA profile.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Arteyu ? _{Blame it on me !} 20:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]